Green Line to Lechmere Delayed

From Starts & Stops:

According to Joe Pesaturo, more structural repairs are needed on the viaduct and service won't start till early fall.

Dang. Just dang. I was looking foward to riding up to Lechmere this summer.



Text of Article:


A tear for Lechmere

Cynthia of Cambridge recently asked a T bus driver when the train was due to start running again between Lechmere and Government Center on the Green Line. The driver said two years.

He was wrong about the length of the delay, which T officials said last week is now three to four months.

Background: The trolley line has been using bus shuttles between Lechmere and Government Center as the T completes a new $325 million underground route for the line after the dismantling of the elevated Green Line last year.

The change will allow for smoother transfer to subway service from North Station commuter rail. It was supposed to take a year, which meant completion sometime this month.

But the predicted yearlong project has hit some snags, namely more structural repairs than anticipated on the deteriorating viaduct that runs in front of the Museum of Science and up to Lechmere, said T officials.

MBTA spokesman Joe Pesaturo said the trolleys would now begin running sometime in the ''early fall," but he refused to be any more specific.

Nooooooooo!! I was planning to ride the GL to Lechmere via the new tunnel before I go back to school

I have been working on Cambridge street in cambridge since Feb. and I hate how the T lies and they get away with it. They promised June. They are delaying this to annoy more riders and force them to leave transit.

mb41 wrote:I have been working on Cambridge street in cambridge since Feb. and I hate how the T lies and they get away with it. They promised June. They are delaying this to annoy more riders and force them to leave transit.

Now, I don't know whether they handled this part of the project right or not...it seems like they waited to start work on the viaduct until March or APril of this year. Strikes me as though they should have started last summer to avoid this sort of thing.

However, to annoy riders? Look at it from this standpoint: that bus route is a slow, inefficient route that is probably costing them a lot more than just running the trains. Given loss of revenue from people defecting from transit, and the added cost, its in their interest to get it up and running as soon as it's safe.

Well, I think the T is up to no good.

Fred Maloney made a good point to me about the canceling of the type 8 cars. Stop the order and then the T can later say, well we don't have enough handi capped cars to run the arborway route, this is if the line go approved.

I think that the T waited way to long to start work on the viaduct but in all fairness we had an extremely long winter and everytime there was a period construction could start a snow storm came along.

mb41 wrote:I have been working on Cambridge street in cambridge since Feb. and I hate how the T lies and they get away with it. They promised June. They are delaying this to annoy more riders and force them to leave transit.

Lied? They projected it to be done in June. They never lied, decieved, falsely claimed, acted improper. They hit the same snags that delayed any other project done this past winter and early spring and this summer as well. They can't control the weather, they can't control the contractors, they can't control the hundreds of other factors that delay projects. This time it wasn't their fault.

Please! There was no reason to take the EL down. Now us riders suffer on sucky shuttle buses. Can you tell I am frsustared with the T We lost the A, the Arborway E, the Main line EL and the green EL.

mb41 wrote:There was no reason to take the EL down.

Taking it down allows an integrated Orange/Green station. It might not be what you call necessary, but it's an improvement, and if the former Boston Garden parcel and accompanying N. Station expansion is ever developed, it'll be a much more seamless integration with the Commuter Rail. Better connections speed trips and have a positive impact on ridership.

It's a shame they couldn't continue the tunnel to Lechmere and remove the viaduct.

Tear the viaduct down, that is history preserved by Boston. Danny Cohen and Bradley Clarke worked hard to save that. I am all for the extension to Medford

mb41 wrote:Tear the viaduct down, that is history preserved by Boston. Danny Cohen and Bradley Clarke worked hard to save that. I am all for the extension to Medford :)

I'm all for the extension, too. But while I admit the viaduct has historical significance, I think it's like a Chinese Wall at the mouth of the basin. Rather than get into a debate over which old things are worth saving and which are just old, I'll concede that the viaduct is there to stay for quite some time. I just wish they had built a tunnel in 1910 rather than the viaduct.

we don't need more tunnels!!! I rather ride high above ground so I can see my city. With the El's gone riding under ground sucks. First of all we are all buried under ground so who wants to spend so much living time under there, two more tunnels mean more opportunities for the bad people to do naughty things.

mb41 wrote:They are delaying this to annoy more riders and force them to leave transit.

I feel your anger, but what would they get out of that?

Not to justify the fact that there is a delay, but 3-4 months is a pretty mild one, this is the T here, Any delay under a year is only a moderate one.

pete wrote:It's a shame they couldn't continue the tunnel to Lechmere and remove the viaduct.

Why would you ever want to remove the viaduct? The el was bad enough to lose from a fans perspective although i do understand the public approval. but the viaduct is not ugly, it does not shade a street, it does not prevent any connections...

Thank you 5706, I like your thinking.

CRail wrote:Why would you ever want to remove the viaduct? The el was bad enough to lose from a fans perspective although i do understand the public approval. but the viaduct is not ugly, it does not shade a street, it does not prevent any connections...

I'm not sure about a "fan's perspective," but it's my opinion that a tunnel from the start would have ben better. I've never liked it, what can I say. It's excessive in my opinion, too massive for its location. And it blocks the view corridor, in landscape design terms, of the Charles Basin. It isn't ugly, but I don't find it particularly visually interesting, either. As far as tunnels being a negative thing, well, I like tunnels. I think they serve a good purpose.

If it were in a better location I might feel differently, but I just find its siting and design unfortunate. I don't care how heretical that sounds. You're entitled to your own opinions.